Why Did the Military Choose the Sig Sauer P320?

By now, you’ve probably heard the U.S. Army said farewell to Beretta and its aging M9 platform. The winner took home the trophy (worth $580 million), and Sig Sauer now stands to benefit from all that sweet government money.

Back in 1985, the U.S. Army adopted the Beretta 92 / M9 after shelving the venerable 1911 and its massive .45 ACP caliber for the smaller, sleeker, and newer 9mm weapon system. Among more than a little controversy and grumbling, the Army moved forward with the M9. It was far from universally loved, but it served the military dutifully for well over 30 years.

Fast forward to 2011. The Beretta is showing its age. The Italian pistols were reaching the end of their service life, and the military wanted something new. The contract was up and they saw a need for a handgun they can easily swap parts on or possibly change the weapon’s caliber, grip, sights, and even the frame. Most importantly, they also wanted a one-stop shop for parts, optics, suppressors, and ammunition. This would later come in handy for Sig.

Glock 17

Sphinx SDP

STI/Detonics STX

Smith & Wesson M&P M2.0

FNH Five-seveN 2.0

Beretta APX

CZ P-09

Pictured: There were many entrants into the Army’s XM17 Program. Glock entered variants of the G17 and G22, KRISS entered an MHS variant of the Sphinx SDP, STI International and Detonics Defense partnered together to enter an STX model, Smith & Wesson partnered with General Dynamics for a new M&P9 handgun, FNH reportedly submitted a new version of the Five-seveN pistol, Beretta opted to enter the APX, and CZ submitted an MHS model of their P-09 handgun.

The military selected three weapons systems in August 2016 to compete in the final stages of testing. They chose among several capable juggernauts of the gun industry. Names like GLOCK, Smith & Wesson, and of course, Beretta. GLOCK unsurprisingly entered a G17, a weapon already carried by so many police and military, it’s almost synonymous with duty guns. Smith & Wesson sent the Army a slightly beefed up M&P. Beretta entered its fancy new APX. Other brands in the early stages of testing included STI, KRISS, FN Herstal and CZ.

After years of testing, delays and typical government red tape, the Army finally gave the Sig Sauer P320 the crown. So now, we’re forced to ask, why this gun? The bore axis looks atrocious. Doesn’t the GLOCK 17 already have years of proven reliability? Doesn’t the M&P harness the latest in manufacturing technology? Doesn’t the APX take care of most of the requirements the military proposed? The answer lies in a somewhat muddy cross section of price, features, modularity and performance. One day, the military may release their precise rationale, but here’s what we know so far:

The Sig P320 can be configured to the users preference.

The M9 has few modern accouterments, so the military wanted to take advantage of handgun technologies that civilians spent the last two decades enjoying on even the most basic weapons. They wanted MIL-STD-1913 Picatinny rails for attaching gizmos, threaded barrels for suppressors, ambidextrous controls and loaded chamber indicators. The P320 hit all these checkboxes with ease. However, the modularity of the Sig is where it really shines. The serialized portion of the handgun, the part that’s legally a gun, is made of solid steel and lives inside the grip assembly and external frame. Therefore, if you ruin all the parts on your sidearm by running it over with a Humvee, you can swap out almost all the components without having to transfer a brand new “gun” to your unit.

Not a fan of the 9mm caliber and want something hotter, larger, or both? No problem, the P320 can easily shift between .40 S&W and .357 SIG with a simple parts swap—no tools needed. Sporting freakishly tiny or huge hands? Interchangeable grips come standard. All personnel will have a comfortable sidearm that actually fits their hands at the ready. Left-handed? Sig added ambidextrous thumb safeties and slide releases. Don’t like reloading as often? Extended magazines are also part of the deal. Like handgun optics? The pistol also boasts a removable panel on the top of the slide to accommodate them.

Realistically, training thousands of troops who in many cases have never held a real gun in his or her life before their military career is a challenge. Now, attempt to train those troops to safely carry, operate, and maintain an old single action/double handgun like the M9 in a war zone; it is exceedingly difficult. The P320 simplifies training in its striker-fire design. No external hammers. No muss. No fuss.

The bottom line is the military had a very tall order. The Army’s Final Solicitation document, which contained details and terms of the military’s requirements, was a staggering 351 pages long. They asked for a weapons system that anyone of virtually any size can use, be repaired on the fly, upgraded, downgraded, modified or tweaked to each warfighter’s needs. It needed to be simple to operate, even simpler to repair, and most importantly, deliver rounds downrange accurately and reliably. Our military personnel deserve the absolute best equipment available, and it looks like the P320 just might deliver.

Do you think this was a smart move? Would the military be better off with an FN, GLOCK, or M&P? Should the military have simply replaced the M9 with more M9s? What about bringing the 1911 out of retirement and going back to the .45 ACP? Let us know in the comments below.

Not sure if the Army’s P320 will be made there, but I’m pretty sure most of Sig’s guns are made in 2 different plants, both of which are in New Hampshire. The military uses a few weapons that are designed by foreign manufacturers, like the M249 and the M240. Both of those are manufactured in the US though.

The Sig is an excellent firearm but, In my opinion, the Glock has a well long proven track record. It has been used by numerous Law Enforcement Agencies for years.
When the upper management of some LE agency’s made the decision to turn in their Glocks for a different Firearm, a lot of Officers were not happy. They trusted that Glock shoots all the time, every time.
Again, no disrespect to the Sig. It is a fine firearm, I just believe the Glock has been used by more longer.

Good point, but misses the whole point of the issue. Include all aspects of the criteria and you see why they made their choice. BTW. I own four Sigs, all different, have never had ANY kind of failure. What would you want your kid carrying in a war zone?

I’ve used both Glock & Sig for duty weapons. I by-far, prefer the Sig. You cannot get a better weapon IMO. When “My Life” is on the line.. I’d prefer to have a Sig Sauer on my side. That’s just ME though. 20yrs exp.

I would not bring the 1911 out of retirement. The first rule in survival is to take cover. Should you find yourself shooting at heads, you want the most accurate, controllable, and rapid fire pistol you can get with a large magazine capacity. Can’t stop someone with just one shot? Shoot him three times. It doesn’t take much longer. Getting away from ball ammo helps allot. Learning to hit the bullseye helps the most. Also, you have to remember that some of today’s armed forces personnel are female. They are going to score higher with nines.

As for accuracy, my 45 may not be “quite” as accurate as a 9, but I suspect the difference is negligible in a combat situation. When you get one shot, bigger is always better. I carry a Sig P938 (9mm) rather than a P238 (380) for that very reason. I carry the P938 because my 1911 won’t fit in my pocket.

Totally agree that the Glock has been a proven platform and started the polymer striker-fired generation of guns.

Being a firearms geek, I do feel that other manufacturers have improved on the design and have proven to be better than Glocks. If not in dependability, definitely in ergonomics and sexiness. I’m about as excited about a Glock as my best screwdriver in my toolbox.

I’m happy to see Sig getting the contract and will look forward to buying a milspec M17 when they become available to us mortals…

There is no such thing as knockdown power from small arms. It is physics. .The Marines got their fancy new 1911s and had shelve them. With modern ammunition there is virtually no difference in stopping power between 9mm, 40S&W and .45 ACP. I have carried all three caliber weapons in my 39 year career. In a combat zone, having more ammo then less is a good thing. Weight is another accuracy and contolability with a 9mm is much easier for the average soldier or cop. I have carried Glock’s and Sigs in all three calibers as well as Smiths and some others. For the past two years, my duty and off duty weapon has been a Sig P320. As an armoire, the simplicity of working on a Glock or P320 SIG is so much simpler than a Berretta or even a 1911. Parts inventory is minimal with both. Glock has not,significantly improved their design. Their modularity is just grip inserts and the ability to attach an optic. The P320 has a lot more configuration options.

Sometimes the military over complicates things, in my opinion they should have stayed with the Beretta. The improved Beretta model would have been just fine, the new and improved 9mm rounds will do the job when needed. The saving grace for me is at least the weapon chosen is being manufactured in the USA.

On the topic of military service, Sig is no newcomer to the field, ask the SEALS. I’ll give Glock it’s due, however I own a P320 and I, (a civilian), can change out from 40 to 357 and even to 9mm in the dark in less than 30 seconds without trying to rush. A trained marksman could easily be able to do it faster, I just am not in a race against myself. The modularity of the P320 is something you don’t realize the simplicity of until you do it-with no tools needed, none. Easy to clean, not that it needs much to keep shooting, easy to repair, easy to change calibers, easy to use, to sight and one of the best triggers I’ve ever felt on a DA. Crisp. Try it, you’ll see why the Army picked it. Remember, the Army needs a gun an idiot can manage all aspects of and the Sig is just that easy to get the job done and still leave you with a very accurate dependable weapon.

Fortunately, the P320 can also be configured to fire .45 ACP as well (I carry one in that caliber), allowing Special Mission Units or others who need and can effectively use the extra stopping power of the .45 the ability to do so without the logistics complications of having to issue a completely different weapon to those units. I’m a big 1911 fan myself, but must admit that over decades of use I have never had a reliability issue with any SIG Sauer handgun.

Choices have to be made, Sig Sauer is a great company and I wish them well, but this doesn’t mean the top company’s in the running aren’t fit for the job, because they are, I own several of them and they are all reliable well put together firearms..

Glocks came out with a great design… and then did nothing to improve upon it for years. The other manufacturers saw this and capalized. And no offense to Glock, but I’m sure price was a big factor in a lot of Police Department purchases.

Personally, I’ll stick with my old S&W M&P snub-nose revolver. In Vietnam, you could drop it in the mud pick it up, and not clean it and it would keep right on firing. Try doing that with an semiautomatic and you would be doing a disassembly under battle conditions. The more you “modernize” a weapon, the more-vulnerable you become.

Getting rid of the “de-cocking lever” adheres to the KISS principle and the proven Glock (less cost and maintenance) should have been chosen; however, S&W came close and should have been elected to keep the dollars at home with an American company.

I personally use g19 gen 3 never! Had one jam or stove pipe at all! But the p320 is a sper nice firearm been wanting to get one for a couple yrs and yes sig definitely stepped there game up ….get one u wont regret

The military is getting what they hope to be a very versatile weapon with features that none of the other entrants could provide. What concerns me is in order to use the available features pistols would be required to be issued individually to a soldier with the frame size, grip, caliber and acessories tailored to that hand. Will combat units take the company store with them so each soldier can go shopping for just the right parts? Caliber exchange would require barrel replacement at the very least and ammo for multi calibers in a combat zone? I can see a logistical nightmare if that were the plan.
Glock and especially Beretta M9 are long in tooth and there are a lot better standard pistols out there ( I was responsible for transitioning my PD to Glock so I am not a basher) the Smith 2.0 shows real promise that only the future will prove/disprove.
The 1911 has been the best pistol for 100 years but not the best for today’s military made up of folks who did not carry a .22 rifle from the time he was 9 or 10, perhaps the Sig, tailored to the individual will provide a viable service in today’s Army.

I couldn’t agree more about multi calibers in a battle zone being a total SNAFU as well as if every soldier has his own custom fit pistol, picking up someone else’s weapon in time of need now doesn’t feel the same as yours but as foreign as picking up the enemies. Standardization has been the key to winning and being the biggest and baddest military in the world. I guess that with todays soft soldiers we have no choice but to make them each individually comfortable. As far as different calibers for different objectives can work but it needs to be done in a way that is easily identifiable quickly and effectively. Color coding magazines and frames will probably be how this will be done however this will also mean the transportation and storage of large amounts of different ammunition and that has proven throughout time to be extremely difficult and ineffective. I hope that we decide on only two different options or at least as few as are absolutely necessary.
Heaven Help US.

While I am a 1911 guy I do understand the military’s desire of a lighter weight, polymer framed handgun. I do like the fact that our military is taking into the equation the ease of utilizing different caliber set ups for different objectives including the .45acp round. While many feel that Glocks are the cats meow, Sig does have the ability to be a one stop shop for our military. I am still a fan of the Beretta line and think that its a shame that they as a company didn’t step up and go the extra step asked to be able to fire the .45acp rounds as well as to design and be able to furnish the additional accessories desired from a one stop vendor.
I am looking forward to the Governments release of millions of used M9 pistols and ammunition as I believe that as we are gradually pulling away from or leading the way, however you want to look at it, from the U.N. 9mm will be effectively phased out of use by U.S.forces.
Keep in mind that Beretta will not go under because of loosing this contract, they infact will pick up contracts worldwide from third world nations at a considerably higher profit margin then they were making with most of their eggs in one big basket.
God Bless America and God Bless Our Troops
Lee Rosevear
Boise, Idaho

Yes there were many contenders, but the requirements were meant for a vast number of soldiers with different hand types and sizes and previous experience which might need to pick up a weapon and use it quickly with trying to remember about safeties and weight and size. The Sig P320 does all this and more. Easy to disassemble, clean, replace parts quickly and easily, and easy to operate. I have many pistols but love my Sig P320.

I really think we should field American firearms. Made by American companies. That being said I would have chosen the M&P. However the Sig may be the best and most modern, up to date of all of those that were entered. I have handled pretty much all of them. The Sig is the most versatile. It has the best trigger. great sights. Is very ergonomic. Points well. And is easily reconfigured. It really is a solid choice. I’m so very glad the Glock was not chosen.It is a very dated design. And does not point well. Most of the others are great improvements on the Glock design.

Glock vs Sig, blond vs redhead, Chevy vs Ford… all are good (subjectively) so it boils down to the eye of the beholder and the beholder’s experience level. I will say though that right now the Sig wins on points for ease of interchangeable parts and ambidextrous use, but if Glock steps up and matches the Sig on bling I would pick the Glock based on its shootability.

The Army outlined a plan, modified the requirements, reviewed the result, put it in writing and released it for bid. Samples were acquired, checked against the bid requirements where many failed. Testing was done with an eye toward requirements of the end user.
I am confident the Army got the best pistol for the original plan.

I own Glocks, H&Ks, FNs, SIGs, Beretta and several other brands. They all function well and reliably. I do find it humorous that many Glock advocates cite that they have been around for such a long time and are highly reliable in the hands of police officers. Yes Glock was the first successful polymer handgun. Over the years Glock has made minor improvement but is essentially the same gun that was introduced so long ago. Time and technology has moved on and Glock is still riding on its original success rather than innovating and moving forward. Glock sales have been declining in recent years, partly due to their price and the fact that other brands have caught up and in many cases, surpassed them (most at same or lower price point). As to reliability, go check the various Glock forums. You might be surprised. I own P320 compact it shoots very accurately and so far after 1350 rounds of commercial and personally made hollow point reloads I’ve not had a single malfunction. One of the real beauties of the P320 is one can completely remove the trigger assembly and thoroughly clean along with the field stripped parts in just about the same amount of time. There are no pins to punch out, no pieces of parts spewed all over the place. Just pull the take down lever out and lift the trigger module out. It’s all there in one module. Try that with any of the other brands. Simplicity and modularity.

I am retired from law enforcement and have used the Glock, Beretta and the Sig. Side by side the Sig is much smoother and quicker to get back on target. I am also a strong advocate of not telling anybody what the best gun is. They have to try them and pick the one that they like best. So that being said, the army had to pick one with the most options and the best choice was the modular Sig.
We had a problem with the Glock frames cracking so the CEO and upper management of Glock came out to see the problem and solve it. It took a few months but they solved it.
The choice of gun is only half the issue. Ball ammunition vs. hollow point or ballistic tip is one of the biggest issues for our military. Following the stupid rules of engagement and restrictions on ammo is insane, hopefully common sense will prevail.

Simple matter is that GLOCK is more prevalent in America so magazine compatability is a primary consideration. The ability for anyone being able to toss you a magazine you can load up immediately is ideal. Operators who choose their own weapon most often choose a G21 in .45acp for very good reasons. Right way, Wrong way, and the Army way… SNAFU BAR! ?????

Given that dum dum, hollow pt rounds are forbidden to soldiers, a .45 is till best choice. Should have gone to a US company. SW, Colt, etc. Sig is a fine co. As is Berretta. At least they will build them here and employ US wirkers.
CW4 Karl

Simple way to turn pistol selection from easy (reliable and modular) into disaster (lefties).

When adding a requirement for ambidextrous controls the Glock is out along with Sphinx, and S&W. These guns offer nothing but the standard reversible magazine release (which is almost standard in modern guns and barely worth mentioning).

CZ and FNH have added an ambi safety to their models, but no slide release (STX-Detonics doesn’t mention anything about ambidextrous controls, but the photos show the possibility of reversible safeties and MAYBE a slide release).

That only leaves Beretta and Sig to chose from using merely one of the hundreds of points that the panel was using for selection (and choosing Beretta again would almost surely have raised questions about favoritism and bribery).

TLDR; Only the Sig and Beretta are true ambidextrous pistols, and the choice between the two was limited by already having a contract with Beretta.

If I’m not mistaken the last time it was open for bid Beretta won the contract over the Sig Sauer P226 in part because it was cheaper to purchase. I have over 40 pistols of all kinds and several Glocks , but the one i like to shoot best is my Sig Sauer P320 compact…

I have a 45cal 1911 custom made Caspian tactical commander. Beautiful gun and right on accurate. If my life was on the line I would not want a 9mm, but a 40 or 45. Still, my S&W 40 cal has never misfired in over 1000 rounds. I would change the sig to a 40cal. and how can you go wrong with any of those firearms? I like the threaded barrel. I wanted to buy a 40 cal Walther PPQ, but the corrupt gov in California makes it impossible. I’ve considered a Glock twice, but it just does not feel good in my hand.

The “difference” in modularity between this, and other modern polymer-frame pistols, is relevant only to lawyers and civilian retail customers.

If you fall into that latter category, the SIG is mighty convenient: thanks to irrational BATFE regulatory opinions, you can deal once with the paperwork drill, background check (and – depending on where you live – possibly a waiting period as well) to buy that little chassis; then acquire what, for all intents and purposes, are a variety of different pistols for years thereafter, as hassle-free as pins or springs.

That’s just it, though: every time you swap – regulatory administrivia aside – you’re buying (and paying for) a new gun. Regulators somewhat arbitrarily pick and choose which component to serialize from one design to another; gunsmiths recognize the “barreled action” – the part that contains the barrel, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism – as the heart of the firearm. All of that is in the “upper”, the slide and barrel assembly, whether you’re talking about the P320 or the Glock. Both contain trigger mechanisms and slide rails in a polymer lower; the fact that one allows you to remove them from the $15 plastic handgrip is thoroughly meaningless from the manufacturing, mechanical, or logistical (much less shooting, handling, or maintaining) point of view of a thinking military customer.

The biggest problem that the military faces was already stated, but I feel has been downplayed by every commentator on the subject. Many a newer service member has little to no experience with firearms, especially handguns, and the basic military training is appallingly unsatisfactory (even one even gets it at all). Society at large (and somewhat the gun community) have inflicted this upon ourselves. With so many people not learning any of the basics before becoming an adult, we’ve had to cater to the lowest common denominator, and it is making us weaker as a society (and our military). This is a hardware fix to a software problem. While I’m all for updating weapons tech, and streamlining the supply chain (I do understand the logistics issues solved by this), I feel that firearms tech is going in the wrong direction sometimes.

Enough with the 1911A1!. Yes, it is a great gun, but so was the 1903 Springfield, in it’s time. There is a reason new Chevys don’t have carburated V8 engines anymore. They are very heavy and inefficient, do not have a enough power for their weight/displacement, and use too much gas. I am over 60 years old and like muscle cars and 1911s as much as the next old guy,. But I now carry modern lightweight polymer framed guns because they are lighter, reliable and in some cases carry more ammo than the big all-steel guns. Embrace progress! Each design has their weaknesses and strengths.

According to former USMC gunsmith I know the M9 had a internal problem that never was fixed right,while the 1911 is way to complicated
to learn to use-safeties-the 320 might be the right gun for today-tomorrow?

Can somebody give me your opinion of the new HK V9 ?
I’m not a fan of the 9 mil.( I’m sure they come in different calibers).
But the craftsmanship is second to none, and the trigger is the best in the industry!
So what’s the scoop??? Thanks for all reply’s.

sig sauer is not what it used to be, their quality control and customer service is for shit. I predict the sig p320 will be a total failure in combat. I’ve already seen many failures to go into battery and light primer strikes. striker fired guns are prone to failure especially when weather and the elements come into play. only time will tell how this plays out.

I DON’T FEEL IT IS WORTH SPENDING 590 MILLION,The nation is over 20 trillion in debt,use what they have ,replace what is damaged with new Beretta’s . The rifle is the main weapon and that is something we should look at and changing out with a heaver caliber like a 6.8 . Pistols are back up weapon only ,aside from MP’s how many carry it as a main weapon at all times ?

As an owner of several SIG’s I am very pleased with the US Army’s choice. Sig Sauer is made in Exeter N.H. The 320 is an excellent platform for multiple different calibers as well as size of grips as the article explained .

These are all great weapon systems. And not just because I’m a 1911 fan and it being my favorite of all pistols. It has proven for over a century it’s capability on the battle field and the 45acp is and always be the best caliber for any situation. 1911 all the way. But that being said, I think the sig was a great choice.

Why are we giving all this work to the Germans. They could go to Colt and have them make a 9mm on an 1911 frame….oh yeah….they already do. The Germans aren’t doing us any favors. Check out the gear casing mess they built for the Lotral ship…hope they do a better job on these pistol.

Sig is a great gun, and so are Glock and Beretta. Never carried a Sig in a war zone, although i have carried a Glock and a Beretta, and both were excellent. Nevertheless, I am sure the Sig will fill the bill nicely. One thing I do have to question in the article is the line, “No problem, the P320 can easily shift between .40 S&W and .357 SIG with a simple parts swap¬—no tools needed.” Neither the .40 nor the .357 Sig are in general use in the US military, so I don;t see the attraction there.

Everyone needs to realize we are not just talking about the regular Army. There will be special forces, FBI, CIA and other agencies. There are some 357 rounds that can punch a lot harder and the .40 was chosen( if not developed) for the FBI as I recall. Overall I think this was a good choice. Time will tell. I like my 1911 45 but too big to carry everyday so I carry a S&W 9mm.

The .45 ACP is a great round! I own a Springfield Armory XD which is accurate, reliable and has plenty of stopping power. The mag carries 13 rounds and with one in the chamber this striker fired, polycarbonate frame pistol is simply awesome!

I think they made a good choice & not blindly pick glock because of it’s supposed reputation; it’s too outdated & long in the tooth. I don’t own any Sigs, but from what I see they make good stuff. For myself it’s 99% Ruger.

I have carried several versions of the Beretta 92, Glock 22,23,19, 30, S&W M&P45 as well as traditional Sigs like the P229, P224, P220. I have never had any issues with any of those in the 39 years that I have carried a handgun. However, I just selected the P320 to replace the traditional Sig Sauer P series P229 and P220 pistols that my department was carrying. The P320sc in 9mm is now my only carry gun. It is versatile, configurable and has one of the best triggers right out of the box. I can list pros and cons for almost everyone of the previously mentioned handguns. However, with the Sig P320, I have not found a con yet.

I have had a SIG P320 for over a year now and probably close to 2000 rounds through it. It goes bang at every pull of the trigger and hits where I aim when I follow good basic pistol shooting practices.

retired Military @ LEO
I think the government made a poor choice in selecting a combat sidearm,they should chosen the GLOCK.Being a retired instructor we all have a preference,mine is GLOCK it is known as the AK-47 of handguns.Our department put them to their paces from burying them in sand,mud,wet clay,fine dirt,no firing problems,no problems feeding,no problems with slide action,you cannot hurt this weapon,but the SIG SAUER is a very fine weapon also but not to rugged,get dirt or any other substance I have listed,the weapon will jam,not feed well,etc.this weapon want to be clean and in battle,ask any Military or LEO the outdoors are not clean and that is why most FEDERAL, POLICE and SHERIFFS offices pick GLOCK.They are tried and true.

What I’m most intrigued by is the fact that modern manufacturing and design techniques have produced so many super reliable weapons, so much so that as the selection process got down to the wire, nary a word was spoken about any such mundane subjects as reliability, accuracy, durability and ergonomics. Pretty much all of the weapons submitted were all of these things and more. Think about it – having to choose a winner out all of these entrants couldn’t have been easy, even if you take all the politics and power-players out of the equation! Having had the pleasure of owning a few Sigs over the years, I am sure our troops will come to appreciate them as much as I have.

Sig is a fine firearm, as are the others. The only issue that I do see is the customization ability of the firearm for each shooter. these aren’t personal pistols, anyone should be able to pickup any other pistol and operate it proficiently and they should feel and react the same. If you have different grips, different sights and especially the ability to fire different calibers you open yourself up to grabbing an empty firearm with no way to reload it in a desperate situation. who wants to have to look at the slide/barrel and available magazines to see whether it is a 9mm .40 or .357 sig when you are being over ran by an enemy ?

I guess the emphasis on the grip size has something to do with the increasing number of women in the military. Suiting both a 6′ 5″ mega guy and a petite woman would be a challenge and both need to be very comfortable with their weapon, as in the critical moment, both are equally effective as shooters.

Personally I’m glad they did not pick the glock. Glock’ do not fit all hands nor are they comfortable to all shooters. I am not a glock hater as I own a G20 in 10 mm as it is one of the only 10 mm’s available in California and is most decidedly the most reliable. That being said rhe ergonomics are quite what I would call great. I think the military made a great choice as every Sig I own I would bet my life on at any time in any condition as I would my 1911’s.

I had to carry an issue Glock 22 for about 14 years prior to retirement. Didn’t like Glocks then and don’t like them now. Not saying they are not dependable guns, but then some folks don’t like Pontiacs or horseradish. My wife, also law enforcement, and I have several Sigs from the tiny P-238 to a pair of P-220’s and every caliber in between. They have all been dependable, accurate and comfortable to shoot. What more can be said. Go SIg.

I think we should go back to a .45 platform ( not the 1911, way too slow and s/a). This cartridge has worked for seventy five years. All our enemies use a dinky nine mil. Not me, I always carry a .45. Allah dumb butt carries that junk all day long. I want to know the job was done right the 1st time.

There seem to be a bunch of gun nuts on this blog. I have seen blogs about 9mm v 40mm as to which is the best round to use, and several others. Unlike the blogs seen on much more relevant topics such as what Ms. Kardashian is wearing or even on important topics such as political debate issues, I am shocked to see that nearly ever NRA blog or blog such as this that not only attracts knowledgeable, passionate people with strong opinions, but they seem to be able to use that passion to express their opinions without finding it necessary to demean, defame, or deride, the previous posters with language that would make a Marine blush. Liberal friends would never read this blog or others like it, but they make me proud to be what they call a gun nut. Interesting how it is politically incorrect to use a Indian name for a sports team, but those who disagree are idiots with pea-brains in the most civil of their debates – which is uncommon. No such thing here. Opinions are well-reasoned and each has support. Having said that, I spent 28+ years in the military both in combat arms and as a JAG officer. Contracts such as the one here are legally complicated by politicians who put laws into effect to benefit their district (the Brooks Act for computers from then Texas Instruments representative Brooks). The arcane process is not always a result of a Pentagon lawyer or accountant, but often driven by congressional mandates. Despite all of this, and having qualified with a 45, 9mm, M16, M4 & 38, I came to the conclusion that a 10mm is the most effective modern round for battle. My understanding is that it was developed for the FBI after 3 agents were killed using 9mm against large caliber opponent despite FBI shots that should have been kills. Unfortunately, not all agents had the upper body strength to handle the recoil so the 40 was developed (40 slow & weak was the derogatory term I heard). Not certain of the veracity of that story as only 1 retired SA confirmed it. Thus, a similar problem could exist with the 40 with the force composition & training the military receives today. Unfortunately, it is inadequate in most units as they have to be taught not to sexually harass others and similarly important training that common courtesy would resolve. Thus, it seems the Sig a very good choice if it is easily modified as advertised. From what I hear & read from those with more knowledge of the weapon than I, in a world of compromises forced on the military by the other outside forces mentioned, to name a few: it appears hat the best gun won. I think the 45 would fail with many members for the same reason the 10mm reportedly did with the FBI. The alternative to recoil would be a gun that some could not hold on target using two hands – rendering it useless.

Glocks apparently have a huge following, and deserve a lot of respect for their design. The problem I see is the large number of accidental discharges. You have to pull the trigger on a Glock to take it apart. When you have a large number of people in close proximity, you don’t want an accidental discharge, EVER. Repeating the author, you have many people who have never held a weapon in their hand in their life prior to this training… A model 1911, in comparison to any of the modern pistols is actually difficult to assemble/re-assemble. The interchangeability Sig offered is likely the decisive factor. Personally, I prefer the hammer over the striker. But then, I am not the one who has to train the hordes of youth they do…

The interchangeability and modularity of the sig won the show. And I must admit I started looking for one. But here are some things I’ve seen in the interwebs. I have virtually watched the very YouTube video I could find on the p320 and the compact. And on about 3 separate videos from different channels (2 of them not popular channels) I saw light primer strikes that wouldn’t fire.

I own a couple glocks myself and actually think they are pretty ugly…but the one I’ve had for 10 years has never misfed and never failed to fire. And I’m not even saying glock should have won the contract, but maybe FN should have.

Oh, I was also at the range today and saw the guy shooting next to me with his compact M&P jam (probably failure to eject once and light primer twice). That was just today. So I’m not gonna lie, I kinda thought this whole M&P line was a gimmick to get people to buy them a few years back…and I say that because it’s called Millitary and Police, but crap, M&P don’t carry M&P’s!!! They throw them together and figure they will make more off all of them they sell to pay for the few hundred they have to replace or work on

Maj. Tommy gun ret.
After 4 tours boots on the ground in Viet and a tour in Iran in 80s as well as a lifetime of very weapon.
I feel that I must say, pistols are a last ditch effort.
The new sig will probably do just fine as many others would.
But just don’t get caught up in believing that your pistol is a great tool and don’t over think it or become bossed with it.
Assault rifles are the whole game for those always in the excrement and for a lot of hard fighting against different enemies.
The pistol is a grain of salt and never to be seriously pondered over but work hard on the assualt rifle world and don’t ever try and even consider going up against assualt rifles with a pistol, regardless of which one
Please don’t over debate this .